Just a Note...

The Troth stands by its Mission and its position as a leader in inclusive Heathenry. As a leading voice in Heathenry, it is important that we are clear in our actions and our deeds. Rumors are circulating that The Troth was somehow responsible for the AFA losing use of the site at Camp Courage. This is not the case at all.
When searching Twitter for posts on Asatru Folk Assembly, these tweets immediately come up:
They are both from a Minneapolis "Antifa" (anti-fascist) group. The first asks for people to contact the campground and get the AFA banned. The second congratulates them for doing so.
Any issues the AFA has with the cancelation should be directed to this non-Heathen Minneapolis group.
This post represents official Troth policy or is an official Troth statement.


I am neither a member of the Troth or the AFA. My own views on identity are more localist than McNallen's (see my response to his "no more mutts" piece at http://elfishpolitics.blogspot.se/2016/09/a-quick-response-to-mcnallens-...). But I am worried about a specific political orthodoxy being pushed among Heathenry by the Troth in the Heathen Service post and others below.

My wife is not of European descent or culture. My children are of mixed heritage in this regard as well But my wife's culture resembles what we see in our sagas more than any European culture does today. It is strongly decentralized to the point even where blood feuds sometimes take the place of the state monopolizing force.

In such a society (the direction I think we should go), society is aggressively heteronormative and family honor matters a great deal. One's own children become one's primary support in retirement and so procreation is a part of the ideal of the good life. I am concerned that there is an effort to create a political orthodoxy which says "it doesn't matter what race, sexual orientation, etc you have, as long as you follow white European modern social theories because anything else is racist and homophobic." But such is also tantamount to calling our own ancestors homophobic just because they didn't look at gender and sexuality the way we do today. And if that's the point, why dishonor them like that?

Does include political inclusivity into the cultural question of what marriage and family structure should be? Can the Troth tolerate people who believe that retiring with one's own children (which means having children) should be an ideal part of the good life?

It does not dishonor your ancestors to accept others as they are.


Certainly we should treat those who do not follow the normal view of a good life with humanity (note I did not say "with equality" because I don't know what that means), give them an opportunity to contribute to the common good and recognize them for their contributions. I don't think that's at issue.

But I also don't think that equality trumps the common good. And frankly there are certain things I would like to see happen that would adversely affect, for example, same-sex couples. I support Sweden's ban on surrogate motherhood and think the US would do well to follow suit. I think sperm banks turn choosing a father for one's children into an exercise of consumerism and should be banned. I oppose those because I think they turn *people* into consumer goods and I don't think the argument that same-sex couples would be adversely affected is a sufficient counterargument.

I also support policy changes to support people retiring with their own children (either biological or adopted). Again, in combination not a step towards equality but a step towards tradition and a step away from capitalism.

So would such viewpoints be seen as beyond the pale because they cut against trendy causes and towards the move to a more traditional society be seen as beyond the pale for the Troth? Does inclusion reach the question of what is a good life and a just society?

Also it occurs to me you may have missed my point about dishonoring the ancestors.

Let me ask plainly:

Our heathen ancestors had a view of sexuality which revolved around hard gender roles (men like to penetrate and pursue, women like to be penetrated and be pursued). Crossing that line was ergi (which of course is not coterminous with homosexual relationships).

Does the fact that they had a strongly heteronormative view on sexuality and a different view of the relationship between sexuality and gender make them homophobic? Should we judge tradition by the standards of the present moment? If so, is that no dishonoring the ancestors?


I do not believe that holding a different view from our ancestors dishonors them at all. Our ancestors are not just those who lived in the Viking age, but all of our kin who have crossed over into the ancestral halls. For most of us that means that many of our ancestors were also Christian, but I do not believe I dishonor any of mine by being heathen. Or, for a more specific example, my great uncle passed away a few years ago and I now count him as one of my ancestors. He was from an earlier, less politically correct age, and he had o qualms about expressing his bigoted views on people with ethnicity different than his own. Did I love him, yes. Did I agree with him, no. Did I ever dishonor him by holding a belief separate form his, absolutely not.

Also, I really do see your point about surrogates and sperm banks, we have so many orphans that need good homes that adoption should be the first choice for couples whether homosexual or not. But to argue that these things make people a commodity also goes against the tradition of our heathen ancestors who took captives and had slaves. People were very much a commodity back then. Do you dishonor them by believing that people should not be viewed this way?